Shawn Maxam discusses how old-school ideas of masculinity inhibit true intimacy
Affection is responsible for nine-tenths of whatever solid and durable happiness there is in our lives.
-C. S. Lewis
Machismo is defined as: A strong or exaggerated sense of masculinity stressing attributes such as physical courage, virility, domination of women, and aggressiveness. I tend to agree with this definition but I would argue that a lack of emotional affection and awareness are a strong component of machismo as well.
I also would argue that machismo can be genderless. Women can also exhibit traditional characteristic of machismo. Being macho can be very destructive in intimate relationships. I would make the claim that the most important aspects of intimate relationships, including friendships and romantic partnerships, are emotional affection and spiritual (using the word in a secular sense) nourishment. The stressors of the outside world can be very debilitating to your self-esteem and mental health. The people you truly trust and hope to receive zero judgment for your flaws and mistakes should be the same people who are willing to repair the damage done to you daily by everyone else.
But much too often our closest friends, family members and romantic partners don’t encourage and foster a safe space where this vulnerability can happen. We have become a society of problem-solvers instead of problem-feelers. In other words, instead of being emphatic to the needs of the people we claim to love we become critics who want to fix what we see as wrong with their lives.
Emotional affection isn’t something easily defined—but you feel it when you receive it. It is being uplifting and kind. Being understanding and forgiving. Listening more and speaking less. It is being tender when the rest of the world is harsh. The best way I can describe it is how great parents interact with their children. They pick them up when they fall down…literally and figuratively. These parents tell their children everything will be okay even if they aren’t sure it is.
As we grow up and become adults, we lose this desire to nourish ourselves and others emotional, mentally and spiritually. The next time you speak to someone you care about instead of using the words “Are you okay?” use the phrase “How are you feeling?”. The former already answers the question whereas the latter allows the person you are asking to create their own answer. How are you feeling is the phrase good therapists use with their clients.
Let go of the machismo. Whether you are a man or woman. You don’t have to be aggressive, dominant, emotionally unavailable and exhibit a lack of emotion. Together we can redefine the paradigm that defines masculinity. It starts with you. Inside your heart and your mind and within your home, and between you and those you care about the most.
Photo courtesy of stickwithjosh
About S. Maxam
Hi Shawn, the good news is that some men are starting to do this – particularly in the UK. This is my blog post about it: http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/men-20/201204/men-20. All best, Mark.
As someone who spent a good bit of time in the Near East, which is generally homosocial but also homophobic, I find the UK absolutely amazing and fascinating. It’s perhaps one of the first places in modern times to accept both homosocial and homosexual behaviour.
Mark thanks for sharing that article from Men 2.0. Some of the behaviors you have described among UK males is very interesting. I look forward to you helping to further the discussion on this topic.
Thanks both (Heather and Shawn) – well there will be more on the blog, as well as in the book. And Heather, I use eric anderson’s (ericandersonphd.com) concept of homohysteria to understand why some cultures are homosocial and homophobic, and others are only homosocial in pro-gay times (like US and UK).
So because I’m too lazy to read though all of his articles…well lazy and a bit busy…could you give maybe a quick rundown of what he says on the topic?
Everything in moderation. Traditional masculinity has received a bad reputation in recent decades, but it is important to keep in mind the role that it still plays in society. Simply because modern life demands less physical courage, virility and aggressiveness than in the past does not mean that we should actively discourage the cultivation of these traits. After all, they still keep us fed, safe and populated. Everything has a time and place, vulnerability and machismo included.
I’ve left “domination of women” out of the discussion because it’s a term whose (intentional, I believe) vagueness carries a heavy implication of sexual assault. Conflating machismo with this type of behavior does men a disservice by influencing them to reject their masculinity under false pretenses.
I think the distinction between someone who happens to fit a traditional definition of masculinity, versus a society which prescribes machismo as a symbol of being a man is what’s important. In the latter, you end up with a societal definition of masculinity with excludes emotional affection and focuses on aggressiveness and stoicism. After all, even someone who happens to be more traditionally masculine should still be able to express their emotions when they feel the need to do so.
Hence why I expounded upon the definition of machismo and also said it can be genderless. Both men and women can adopt the less positive aspects of machismo and thus harm their intimate interactions.
Moderation via subtraction of the negative. Thanks for your thoughts and insight.
Aggressions a funny thing. It has utility to it. Like a weapon/tool it has potential as a fuel of sorts to reach a goal but w/o control (most importantly) it’s reckless and destructive (weilder not excluded). For example a military buddy of mine has, on two occasions I know of, harnessed his aggression to get through some intense physical training routines.
Machismo derives (via Spanish) from the Greek makhe, meaning war. It is literally “warriorishness”, and has no linguistic or necessary connection to masculinity per se except through cultural baggage. Women can have it, and other models of masculinity can exist.
Thanks for the insight on the origin of the word Billy.
AFAIK, “machismo” derives from “macho”, spanish (and perhaps portuguese) word for “male”.
See Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machismo
I fully agree with this article, save for this sentence: “As we grow up and become adults, we lose this desire to nourish ourselves and others emotional, mentally and spiritually.”
I think many people, on the contrary, develop this desire while growing up. It’s part of a growing process that’s not only physical, but emotional, mental and spiritual as well. Growing up to become better persons.
Very true Valter. Not every adult loses that desire.